In this research, the qualitative research method is used according to the following detail.
3.1 Methodology
3.2 Key Informants Selection 3.3 Research Instruments
3.4 Construction of Research Instrument 3.5 Data Collection
3.6 Data Analysis and Verification
3.7 Comparative Analysis of Policy Process
3.1 Methodology
This research is a qualitative study, consisting of 2 phases.
1) Documentary research: This phase of study included data collection from academic document, article, journal, thesis, research paper, and the available online, which related toOne Tambon One Product Policy in Thailand and One Village One Product Policy in Japan, in order to conduct the policy analysis using the Multiple Streams Model. The data collection would also include academic paper, research paper, report, research report, conference report, and government document, etc.
2) In-depth interview: 18 key informants who were related to the OTOP policy of Thailand and OVOP policy of Japan would be interviewed in order to gain the related information for the research as well as verification of findings from the secondary data.
3.2 Key Informant Selection
The key informants were selected through the following process.
First step: The researcher would study the academic document, article, journal, thesis, research report, and the data available online and the existing network, in order to find the important persons with related experience to the OTOP policy of Thailand and OVOP policy of Japan.
Second step: After the list of important persons related to the OTOP policy of Thailand and OVOP policy of Japan was created, the researcher would select 18 key informants from both groups, who could be classified in 3 sub-groups. The first sub- group included 3 key informants about OTOP and community. The second sub-group included 3 key informants about OTOP and policy. And the third sub-group included 3 key informants about OTOP and socio-economy. Similarly, the key informants related to the OVOP policy of Japan can also be classified in 3 sub-groups. The first sub-group included 3 key informants about OVOP and community. The second sub-group included 3 key informants about OVOP and policy. And the last sub-group included 3 key informants about OVOP and socio-economy. All key informants are listed as following.
The key informants for OTOP and community
1) Manoon Sornkerd, Pensioner, Community Development Department Ministry of the Interior
2) Thaweep Buthpho, Deputy Director General of Community Development Department, Ministry of the Interior
3) Surasak Aksornkul, Director, Planning and Data Coordination Group, The Community Development Department, Ministry of the Interior
The key informants for OTOP and Policy
1) Sayumporn Limthai, Former Deputy Permanent Secretary of Interior 2) Nisakorn Jungjaroentham, Deputy Permanent Secretary of Industry 3) Dr.Pantita Tantawattana, Environmental Research Institute Chulalongkorn University
The key informants for OTOP and Socio-Economy
1) Yoopin Claymont, Institute of East Asian Studies, Thammasat University and International OVOP Policy Association
2) Dr.Irsoon Ruangrattana-amporn, Independent scholar and International OVOP Policy Association
3) Dr.Warangkana Korkiertpitak, Office of the National Security Council and International OVOP Policy Association
The key informants for OVOP and Community
1) Associate Professor Dr. Somchai Chakhatrakarn, Former President of Thai Student Association under the Royal Patronage at Japan and Former Vice President of Thammasart University
2) Jun Kuwano Aoyama Kakuin University, Japan
3) Daisaku Yanagihara, Teacher and a son of Japanese farmer The key informants for OVOP and Policy
1) Prof.Dr.Hiroshi Muryama, Former dean of Policy Science, Ritsumeikan University, Japan, Mr. Morihiko Hiramatsu’s Ph.D. Thesis Advisor of Policy Science, whom was an initiator of OVOP process.
2) Prof. Dr.Matsumoto Son, Faculty of Policy Science, Kyoto Prefecture University, Japan
3) Masaru Suzuki, Former Specialist at Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA)
The key informants for OVOP and Socio-Economy
1) Assoc.Prof. Hongpha Subboonrueng, Assistant Dean at Faculty of Economics, Thammasart University
2) Assoc.Prof. Dr.Chaweewan Denpaiboon, Faculty of Architecture, Chulalongkorn University and International OVOP Policy Association
3) Dr.Russama Marubodee, Faculty of Agricultural Technology, Rajamangala University of Technology Tawan-ok
After the in-depth interview with the key informants, the researcher would use the Significant Friend technique by requesting the key informants to suggest the additional list for key informants, which were Dr. Preuk Chutimanukul, independent
scholar, and Ajarn Tirarat Shinsaen, Assistant Dean of Agricultural Technology Faculty, Rajabhat Mahasarakham University
3.3 Research Instruments
The research instruments for this study included the document analysis form and the in-depth interview form, which were constructed according to the research framework created from the data collected during the document study and related research analysis. For the data collection, the researcher conducted the conversation, observation, and in-depth interview with the key informants. The questions included the following issues; what were the similarities or differences between the agenda setting process, the roles of policy formulator, the policy formulation process, the policy content, and the policy implementation in the OTOP policy of Thailand and the OVOP policy of Japan.
3.4 Construction of Research Instrument
This involved the preparation for the unstructured interview, which is flexible and open, without any specific order of questions. The researcher would prepare the question topics first in order to completely fulfil the research objectives. The construction of research instrument involved the following steps.
1) Studying the related document and research
2) Analysis the data from the related document and research 3) Formulating the framework for interview
4) Constructing and adjusting the interviewing form
3.5 Data Collection
The data collection involves the following 2 phases
1) Data collection from academic document study, including the academic document, article, journal, thesis, research report, and data available online,
which related to the OVOP policy of Japan and OTOP policy of Thailand. This would be the secondary data which would be used during the analysis of policy process.
2) Data collection from in-depth interview. The researcher informally requested for the cooperation from the organization for interview the speacialist through the telephone and email, in order to inform the speacialist about research. Afterwards, the formal invitation letter would be issued to the organizations of the key informants.
The data collection would be conducted through the in-depth interview, using the open- ended question which allow flexibility and openness as there were no order of question and also possible to pose the deep-level question. The researcher would write the memo and request the permission to record the interview. The question will be selected from the interview form in order to ensure that the answer would correspond to the topic, which would also demonstrate the specialization in the related topic. Afterwards, the question topics would be repeated in order to ensure the complete answer to fulfil the research objectives. After the interview session is completed, the research wouldverify the data results immediately. If there were any queries or unclear topic, the researcher will contact the key informants for questioning via telephone or email.
3.6 Data Analysis and Verification
Nisa Chuto (2008, p. 214) stated that the qualitative research analysis was the systematic process of thinking and organizing which start from entering the field. This involved drafting the question, connecting the data together, and processing the data with various methods such as classification or comparative until direction of data start to emerge.
For this study, the researcher would analysis the data from interview together with the data from document study. The analysis would follow the qualitative research approach, by describing the phenomenon or the evidence, and interpret the data to reach the conclusion. The researcher would process both the data from document and interview memo by conclusion of answer from the interview form.
Afterwards, the researcher would conduct the triangulation method in order to verify the data. According to Supang Chantavanich (2000, pp. 129-130), the triangulation is the principle of data verification in three-way, by not completely believe
that any information source received is already reliable. Thus, the researcher is required to seek other possibility of information source to data reassuring.
The researcher would verify the completion and accuracy of data from interview memo and the secondary data conclusion note. Through the triangulation, the researcher would study various data sources such as academic document, journal, article, thesis, research report, as well as data available online in both Thai and foreign languages, in order to ensure the reliability of data from various sources. Furthermore, the in-depth interview with the different key informants would be compared in order to verify if the information would match. Additionally, the researcher would verify information received during the various periods whether they would match. Then record the frequency of the repeated information from the interview and document study and conclude the finding from the interview and document study.
3.7 Comparative Analysis of Policy Process
The researcher would conduct the comparative analysis of information related to the OTOP policy of Thailand and OVOP policy of Japan, using the policy process analysis approach which start at comparing the agenda setting by follow the Multiple Stream Model. As for the policy formulation process comparative of the OTOP policy of Thailand and OVOP policy of Japan, the Iron Triangle Model would be used in the analysis. And for the policy implementation process, the researcher would use the Top- Down Approach, Bottom-Up Approach, and the 3 principles of OVOP Movement in the analysis, in order to reach the conclusion of policy process for the OTOP policy of Thailand and OVOP policy of Japan.